Thread: reassessing goo
View Single Post
Old 09.03.2007, 07:35 AM   #56
deadrockstar
little trouble girl
 
deadrockstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Edinbu.. Edinbu... Edinboro, England
Posts: 66
deadrockstar kicks all y'all's assesdeadrockstar kicks all y'all's assesdeadrockstar kicks all y'all's assesdeadrockstar kicks all y'all's assesdeadrockstar kicks all y'all's assesdeadrockstar kicks all y'all's assesdeadrockstar kicks all y'all's assesdeadrockstar kicks all y'all's assesdeadrockstar kicks all y'all's assesdeadrockstar kicks all y'all's assesdeadrockstar kicks all y'all's asses
production is only objective when there is a clear direction the producer/band/whatever have declared they want to take (e.g. bass driven mirge) and it doesn't come anywhere close (e.g. it sounds like hank marvin). even then, you'd have a hard job defining it terrible objectively as everyone would hear it differently anyway. e.g. for me heavy music is that sweeping guitar in becuz, to others it is slipknot and to yet others it is ac/dc.

i don't see any such evidence of a failure to produce in the way desired, only ever-so-slight hints that it didn't come out exactly how they hoped. i don't think they expected anything different, but perhaps they just expected it to turn out a bit better.

that said, my subjective view of it is that it has a wonderful sound. perhaps not absolutely perfect production, but far from a disaster.
deadrockstar is offline   |QUOTE AND REPLY|